Ray, C. J. - (1.) In this matter leave was granted on 30 March, 1972 Leave was confined to the question whether Union of India is a necessary party. Leave was granted because it was contended that there were decisions to support the appellant's contention that the Union of India is not a necessary party. We gave leave to settle this question.
(2.) The appellant applied under Art. 226 in the High Court of Rajasthan, The appellant was an employee of the Northern Railway, He was removed from service with effect from 2 January 1969. His appeal against the order of removal was rejected by the General Manager. The appellant felt aggrieved and filed the application under Article 226. The trial court rejected the application on the ground that the Union of India was not impleaded.
(3.) On appeal the Division Bench affirmed the decision of the trial court and held after referring to two decisions of this court that the Union of India is a necessary party.;